Author Description

*Includes pictures *Includes ancient accounts of the cities *Includes online resources and bibliographies for further reading Long before Alexandria was a city and even before Memphis and Babylon had attained greatness, the ancient Mesopotamian city of Ur stood foremost among ancient Near Eastern cities. Today, the greatness and cultural influence of Ur has been largely forgotten by most people, partially because its monuments have not stood the test of time the way other ancient culture's monuments have. For instance, the monuments of Egypt were made of stone while those of Ur and most other Mesopotamian cities were made of mud brick and as will be discussed in this report, mud-brick may be an easier material to work with than stone but it also decays much quicker. The same is true to a certain extent for the written documents that were produced at Ur. No site better represents the importance of the Sumerians than the city of Uruk. Between the fourth and the third millennium BCE, Uruk was one of several city-states in the land of Sumer, located in the southern end of the Fertile Crescent, between the two great rivers of the Tigris and the Euphrates. Discovered in the late 19th century by the British archaeologist William Loftus, it is this site that has revealed much of what is now known of the Sumerian, Akkadian, and Neo-Sumerian people. Hattusa was different from the other major cities of the ancient Near East in one major respect: it was landlocked and not located on a major river. At first glance, such a situation may seem like a liability, which it was in terms of trade, but for the most part its central position meant that the Hittites could move their armies more efficiently from one theater of operations to another (Macqueen 2003, 56). As a landlocked capital, Hattusa was also safe from naval attacks from other kingdoms, so if the Hittites' enemies wanted to invade their capital, they would have to trek through the middle of the kingdom to get there, which